Safety and immunogenicity of ETVAX®, an oral inactivated vaccine against enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli diarrhoea: a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial amongst Finnish travellers to Benin, West Africa.

BACKGROUND: No licensed human vaccines are available against enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), a major diarrhoeal pathogen affecting children in low- and middle-income countries and foreign travellers alike. ETVAX®, a multivalent oral whole-cell vaccine containing four inactivated ETEC strains and the heat-labile enterotoxin B subunit (LTB), has proved promising in Phase 1 and Phase 1/ 2 studies. METHODS: We conducted a Phase 2b double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial amongst Finnish travellers to Benin, West Africa. This report presents study design and safety and immunogenicity data. Volunteers aged 18-65 years were randomized 1:1 to receive ETVAX® or placebo. They visited Benin for 12 days, provided stool and blood samples and completed adverse event (AE) forms. IgA and IgG antibodies to LTB and O78 lipopolysaccharide (LPS) were measured by electrochemiluminescence. RESULTS: The AEs did not differ significantly between vaccine (n = 374) and placebo (n = 375) recipients. Of the solicited AEs, loose stools/diarrhoea (26.7/25.9%) and stomach ache (23.0/20.0%) were reported most commonly. Of all possibly/probably vaccine-related AEs, the most frequent were gastrointestinal symptoms (54.0/48.8%) and nervous system disorders (20.3/25.1%). Serious AEs were recorded for 4.3/5.6%, all unlikely to be vaccine related. Amongst the ETVAX® recipients, LTB-specific IgA antibodies increased 22-fold. For the 370/372 vaccine/placebo recipients, the frequency of ≥2-fold increases against LTB was 81/2.4%, and against O78 LPS 69/2.7%. The majority of ETVAX® recipients (93%) responded to either LTB or O78. CONCLUSIONS: This Phase 2b trial is the largest on ETVAX® undertaken amongst travellers to date. ETVAX® showed an excellent safety profile and proved strongly immunogenic, which encourages the further development of this vaccine.

Safety of fertility preservation in breast cancer patients in a register-based matched cohort study.

PURPOSE: To determine if women with breast cancer that undergo fertility preservation (FP), with or without hormonal stimulation, present with an increased risk of breast cancer recurrence. METHODS: A matched cohort study on women with breast cancer attempting to ensure FP in Stockholm from 1999 to 2013 [exposed women (n = 188), age-matched unexposed controls (n = 378)] was designed using the Stockholm regional data from the Swedish National Breast Cancer Quality Register. Breast cancer relapse rates [incidence rate ratio (IRR)] and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using Cox regression and adjusted for potential confounding factors. Completeness of the registry at the time of the study was close to 99%. RESULTS: Most women attempted FP by hormonal stimulation treatment (n = 148, 79%) with the objective of freezing their eggs or embryos. A smaller group elected FP methods without hormone stimulation (n = 40, 21%). Women who received hormone stimulation did not present with a higher relapse rate than unexposed control women in a model adjusted for age and calendar period of diagnosis (IRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34-1.04). The results remained virtually unchanged after adjustment for tumor size, estrogen receptor status, affected lymph nodes, and chemotherapy treatment (IRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37-1.17). CONCLUSION: Evidence was not found that fertility preservation, with or without hormonal stimulation, was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer recurrence. The high coverage rate of this population-based study supports the safe practice of fertility preservation in young women with breast cancer.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between palifermin and heparin.

Oral mucositis, a severe complication during chemo- and/or radiotherapy, is prevented with palifermin treatment, a recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor (KGF/FGF-7). The FGF family belongs to the larger family of heparin-binding growth factors. Because it has been shown that heparin modulates binding of KGF to the KGF receptor and subsequently affects cellular proliferation induced by the KGF mitogenic signal, it is critical to understand the drug-drug interactions between palifermin and heparin, particularly because of heparin's narrow therapeutic margin. Two studies were performed in healthy subjects to characterize the effect of palifermin on the pharmacodynamics of heparin (activated partial thromboplastin time) and evaluate the impact of heparin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (Ki67 staining of buccal mucosal tissue) of palifermin. Results demonstrated a pronounced pharmacokinetic interaction; heparin coadministration increased the palifermin AUC 4- to 5-fold and decreased its half-life by 40%-45%, suggesting an approximate 70%-80% decrease in palifermin clearance and volume of distribution. These changes in the pharmacokinetics of palifermin during coadministration of heparin, however, did not affect the pharmacodynamic effect of palifermin, or the anticoagulant activity of heparin, and did not lead to increased safety findings. Therefore, these results suggest that dose adjustments for heparin and palifermin are not warranted when administered concurrently.

A simple two-stage design for quantitative responses with application to a study in diabetic neuropathic pain.

Two-stage designs offer substantial advantages for early phase II studies. The interim analysis following the first stage allows the study to be stopped for futility, or more positively, it might lead to early progression to the trials needed for late phase II and phase III. If the study is to continue to its second stage, then there is an opportunity for a revision of the total sample size. Two-stage designs have been implemented widely in oncology studies in which there is a single treatment arm and patient responses are binary. In this paper the case of two-arm comparative studies in which responses are quantitative is considered. This setting is common in therapeutic areas other than oncology. It will be assumed that observations are normally distributed, but that there is some doubt concerning their standard deviation, motivating the need for sample size review. The work reported has been motivated by a study in diabetic neuropathic pain, and the development of the design for that trial is described in detail.